In my view, it's perfectly valid to criticize the fact that the Kim family has been in charge the whole time. However, I don't think that's at odds with having critical support for DPRK.
this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
2 points (100.0% liked)
Communism101
1366 readers
1 users here now
This is a community for those who are new to or unfamiliar with communist, socialist or simply leftist philosophy. Ask basic questions here and learn about what we stand for!
Rules:
- Keep things SFW!
- Keep posts and comments civil.
- Don't attack someone for not knowing "enough" about communism or leftism.
- Civil discussion and debate is welcome, trolling and hate speech is not.
- No racism, sexism, homophobia, inciting crime/violence, etc.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
yeah I think disallowing immediate family (if not more) from holding public power is something every political system newer than "divine right of kings" should do. Hardly anyone whining about north korea gives a shit that the united states went bush - clinton - bush into another clinton being the presumptive candidate and our elections are probably less legitimate than the dprk.
something something royal family something something usual decadence, two of them.
Politics as a career should be the thing to get rid off.
I couldn’t agree more, I’m not a fan of lifetime leaders or nepotism, but their contributions to a better Korea are admirable and inspiring
I agree. For a counterexample, Cuba passed the torch to an outsider after Fidel and Raul retired.
There is a tendency amongst western communists of uncritical support for AES countries. Yes, I do support North Korean people and their right to exist outside of capitalism. Yes, I am critical of their incestuous leadership structure and the consequent corruption that arises from such practices.
You make it seem like it's inherently good to elect someone not related to the previous leader, but we need to take a step back and ask why is this desirable? As was explained in another comment, another chairman was elected before Kim Jong Un but he tried to stage a coup after he was retired for his right-wing reforms (speaking relatively here). Outsider does not always mean better.
Also something I haven't seen people touch on yet is that all three Kim's have held different functions. Kin Jong Un is the general of the armies as well as the foreign minister of sorts (closer to the president but for foreign affairs). That's why we see him meet with foreign officials and we see him at weapons tests. I think he goes to factories and such in his capacity as Chairman of the WPK (and leader of the coalition encompassing three parties in the DPRK's parliament).
all three Kim’s have held different functions.
To add to this, Kim Jong-Un did not run for re-election to the Supreme People’s Assembly in 2019
Is he not in the SPA then? Is he just the party chairman now?
Is he not in the SPA then?
Correct
Is he just the party chairman now?
According to Wikipedia, so take this with a grain of salt, he is “Supreme Commander of the Korean People's Army,” “General Secretary of the Workers' Party of Korea,” and “President of the State Affairs Commission of North Korea.”
Note that I didn't criticize the Kim family specifically.
The whole of North Korean military and governmental high level positions are much more closely related than CPC for example.
Lineal succession of the Kim family is just a visible portion of the inner-circle domination. The Party itself has a problem.
Lineal succession of the Kim family is just a visible portion of the inner-circle domination. The Party itself has a problem.
But again, there is no lineal succession. All three Kims held different positions in government.
That is true. I amend my statement to mean top level positions held by Kim Il Sung's descendents.
But then we are back to the first step comrade, what makes it undesirable that members of a family hold different government positions? Especially in socialism, there's no question about capitalism.
My belief is that in a fair socialist society, there would be a constant flow of outsiders because that is the natural order of things if everyone's given fair education and opportunity.
That has been seen in most socialist countries historical and current. If this state of affairs is not true, that implies the existence of formal or informal institutional mechanisms in which connected people are favored. I dislike such mechanisms inherently after decades of living in it.
I don't see how I would suddenly like such mechanism just because it occurs inside a socialist framework comrade. Equal distribution of material goods and services is not the only concern for me. I also favor socialism due to the fact that impoverished peasants can rise to high stations unlike capitalism. Favoritism towards Pyongyang makes such things less likely.
There are 687 seats in the Supreme People's Assembly, of which Kim Jong Un is not a member anymore (having elected not to be on the ballot at the last elections). There are also countless generals in the army, several ministers, several members of the WPK's central committee, and of course local officials as well as party leaders other than the WPK (there's 2 other parties in the SPA forming a front for the reunification of Korea with the three of them).
Of all these officials, the Kim family had 4 members of their family fulfilling governmental positions. The DPRK even had one of the Kims executed for being a CIA insurrectionary.
I get your distrust of such mechanisms where family ties might get you somewhere, but the DPRK is not a capitalist country. I don't think this is a clear-cut area that we can readily criticize the DPRK on. It only strengthens the "DPRK is a monarchy" argument in the average liberal and right-winger; Kim Jong-Un holds 3 positions (chairman of WPK, supreme commander of the armies and president of the state affairs commission). The title of president, which conferred powers as the head of state, was abolished after Kim Il Sung's death (making him the "Eternal Leader" because he was the only one who ever held that title).
Communists are just fascists just to pretend like the people have any rights whatsoever when they clearly don't. China treats it's own people like slaves and it's the same in every communist country
Communists are not fascists and I can prove it in two seconds, because I know you'll be out there calling for the deportation of minorities in three years time, but you'll never be out there protesting for the nationalisation of resources.
The DPRK isn’t ML, and hasn’t been for like 40 years. They’re kind of doing their own thing.
Each country adapts ML to their own circumstances — in China we have socialism with Chinese characteristics, in North Korea we have Juche, etc.
There is no family line or monarchy. This is just false. People voted for them lmao, they can always change at any time but the people voted for this.
DPRK is a people's democracy. Not a monarchy or whatever people like to claim. Kim Jun Un is a great leader and so were the other kim's, they were all legitimately elected, they were voted because they are great leaders.
No one votes in North Korea, it's not allowed
https://www.indiatimes.com/trending/wtf/shocking-laws-in-north-korea-556386.html
"It is believed that about 200,000 North Koreans live in the camps. They were arrested for alleged political crimes. If a person commits a political crime, his entire family is interned. If a prisoner manages to escape, his entire family would be killed. 40% of prisoners interned in these concentration camps die from malnutrition. Many of them are sentenced to hard labor for seemingly reasonable terms, but more often than not they work to death."
Sounds like a dictatorship to anyone with 4 brain cells
Sounds like a dictatorship to anyone with 4 brain cells
Indeed. lmao. Bold of you to confirm it. 😂😂
Lmao, you're a joke. The voting process in DPRK is well documented if you actually look for real sources.
All men and women can only do one of 28 government-approved haircuts, 18 for women, 10 for men; other hairstyles are prohibited. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un introduced this law in 2013 and did not include his hairstyle on this list because he wanted to keep it unique and absolutely no one can dare to copy his hairstyle. It is assumed that married women should wear shorter haircuts than unmarried women.
Do you sincerely believe this shit? Like are you, Armen12, on this day on Lemmygrad, declaring to the world that you've abandoned all critical thinking and choose to live your life with the cognitive capacities of a lettuce slug from this day forward?
Nobody at the top level believes this crap lol. This is just gossip fodder for fashion magazines to print and remind people that the US and their made up state in the ROK are still at war with the DPRK and they need to keep up some war propaganda once in a while so that some day they can launch missiles at Korea and have people cheer for it.
You can legit go on wikipedia, type up DPRK and go from bluelink to bluelink down into obscure pages that the CIA hasn't touched too much yet and learn about all the state figures in the DPRK that are not Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il or Kim Jong Un. All the state commissions, all the state positions and officials who've held those historically, shit you can even learn about the coalition that forms the Parliament composed of three parties including the WPK.
Do you actually believe that any country in the world would last for more than 10 years if they were this comically evil? The reason nobody at the top level in the west believes this shit is because they know how hard it is to manage macro stuff like, I don't know, an entire country. In the feudal past this ended with revolutions, but there has been no such thing in the DPRK in over 70 years. Why is that? Could it be that you're ignorant and should admit you know nothing but war propaganda about the DPRK? No, it must be the Koreans who are brainwashed and kept on a leash!
Maybe there's a typo. This makes much more sense:
Kim Jong ~~Un introduced~~ Unintroduced this law in 2013 …
Joking aside, this is, again, all projection. When I was in school… if you turned up with a shaved head you'd be sent home until it grew back. If you turned up with too long hair, you'd be sent home to get it cut. If you turned up with hair gel/hairspray or any other product, you'd be sent to the gym showers to wash it out. If you turned up with beads, braids, dreads, cornrows, a few too many bobbles or plaits, you'd be sent home to 'fix it'.
I'm led to believe that schools are marginally less racist nowadays. I'm not convinced. Is France not, right now, going through another wave of Islamaphobia sending muslim girls home for wearing religious/cultural dress over their hair?
Now that I'm in work (and it's been the same in every job), there's a dress code, which includes hairstyles. It's often unofficial. That doesn't make a difference. If you turn up with anything you might call a 'hairstyle', you will be ostracised, bullied, and possibly lose your job. You won't be given any public facing tasks, for a start.
I've not even touched on the shit faced by LGBTQAI2+ workers, for whom a 'non-confirming' hairstyle will be used as evidence of something if it suits bigoted, transphobic, racist colleagues and employers.
I just find it so mind boggling that liberals can live in the same world as me, put a quacky label on something that runs through every society in one form or another, and pretend it doesn't exist under liberalism but does exist in a designated enemy country. And that it's the worst thing ever. As if people in particular places and times don't just wear similar hairstyles, because culture, fashion, religion, etc.
Is France not, right now, going through another wave of Islamaphobia
Yes, and OP shows how frogpilled they are because in another comment (I had to check if the fascism extended beyond just their takes on lemmygrad), they say "France doesn’t ban religious anything, only in schools". You get turned away at public pools if you wear too much there.
Everyone knows China and North Korea don't ban religion (Protip: Religion is illegal in both countries and you're sent to a concentration camp for practicing any religion)
whataboutism and moving the goalposts. Stay on topic.
"The voting process in DPRK is well documented if you actually look for real sources"
Great resources you didn't provide within that wall of text
they didn't provide sources in your link either dipshit.
https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Category:Library_works_about_the_DPRK
Read or I will forever call you a lettuce slug.
So no sources? Didn't think so
The USA still uses prison slavery BTW
- Only government-approved haircuts
Yes because it's literally true and North Korea doesn't even deny any claims
oh my god you're actually terminal, this is so fun 📸